1
|
Thomas JJC, Daley AJ, Esliger DW, Kettle VE, Coombe A, Stamatakis E, Sanders JP. Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Data Sets (Global Physical Activity Data Set Catalogue) That Include Markers of Cardiometabolic Health: Systematic Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e45599. [PMID: 37467026 PMCID: PMC10398367 DOI: 10.2196/45599] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2023] [Revised: 04/18/2023] [Accepted: 05/08/2023] [Indexed: 07/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cardiovascular disease accounts for 17.9 million deaths globally each year. Many research study data sets have been collected to answer questions regarding the relationship between cardiometabolic health and accelerometer-measured physical activity. This scoping review aimed to map the available data sets that have collected accelerometer-measured physical activity and cardiometabolic health markers. These data were then used to inform the development of a publicly available resource, the Global Physical Activity Data set (GPAD) catalogue. OBJECTIVE This review aimed to systematically identify data sets that have measured physical activity using accelerometers and cardiometabolic health markers using either an observational or interventional study design. METHODS Databases, trial registries, and gray literature (inception until February 2021; updated search from February 2021 to September 2022) were systematically searched to identify studies that analyzed data sets of physical activity and cardiometabolic health outcomes. To be eligible for inclusion, data sets must have measured physical activity using an accelerometric device in adults aged ≥18 years; a sample size >400 participants (unless recruited participants in a low- and middle-income country where a sample size threshold was reduced to 100); used an observational, longitudinal, or trial-based study design; and collected at least 1 cardiometabolic health marker (unless only body mass was measured). Two reviewers screened the search results to identify eligible studies, and from these, the unique names of each data set were recorded, and characteristics about each data set were extracted from several sources. RESULTS A total of 17,391 study reports were identified, and after screening, 319 were eligible, with 122 unique data sets in these study reports meeting the review inclusion criteria. Data sets were found in 49 countries across 5 continents, with the most developed in Europe (n=53) and the least in Africa and Oceania (n=4 and n=3, respectively). The most common accelerometric brand and device wear location was Actigraph and the waist, respectively. Height and body mass were the most frequently measured cardiometabolic health markers in the data sets (119/122, 97.5% data sets), followed by blood pressure (82/122, 67.2% data sets). The number of participants in the included data sets ranged from 103,712 to 120. Once the review processes had been completed, the GPAD catalogue was developed to house all the identified data sets. CONCLUSIONS This review identified and mapped the contents of data sets from around the world that have collected potentially harmonizable accelerometer-measured physical activity and cardiometabolic health markers. The GPAD catalogue is a web-based open-source resource developed from the results of this review, which aims to facilitate the harmonization of data sets to produce evidence that will reduce the burden of disease from physical inactivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonah J C Thomas
- School of Sport, Exercise and Health Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- Centre for Lifestyle Medicine and Behaviour, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
| | - Amanda J Daley
- School of Sport, Exercise and Health Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- Centre for Lifestyle Medicine and Behaviour, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
| | - Dale W Esliger
- School of Sport, Exercise and Health Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- Centre for Lifestyle Medicine and Behaviour, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- Lifestyle, National Institute of Health Research Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Victoria E Kettle
- School of Sport, Exercise and Health Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- Centre for Lifestyle Medicine and Behaviour, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
| | - April Coombe
- Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Emmanuel Stamatakis
- Charles Perkin Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - James P Sanders
- School of Sport, Exercise and Health Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
- Centre for Lifestyle Medicine and Behaviour, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Evenson KR, Scherer E, Peter KM, Cuthbertson CC, Eckman S. Historical development of accelerometry measures and methods for physical activity and sedentary behavior research worldwide: A scoping review of observational studies of adults. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0276890. [PMID: 36409738 PMCID: PMC9678297 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2022] [Accepted: 10/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
This scoping review identified observational studies of adults that utilized accelerometry to assess physical activity and sedentary behavior. Key elements on accelerometry data collection were abstracted to describe current practices and completeness of reporting. We searched three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus) on June 1, 2021 for articles published up to that date. We included studies of non-institutionalized adults with an analytic sample size of at least 500. The search returned 5686 unique records. After reviewing 1027 full-text publications, we identified and abstracted accelerometry characteristics on 155 unique observational studies (154 cross-sectional/cohort studies and 1 case control study). The countries with the highest number of studies included the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan. Fewer studies were identified from the continent of Africa. Five of these studies were distributed donor studies, where participants connected their devices to an application and voluntarily shared data with researchers. Data collection occurred between 1999 to 2019. Most studies used one accelerometer (94.2%), but 8 studies (5.2%) used 2 accelerometers and 1 study (0.6%) used 4 accelerometers. Accelerometers were more commonly worn on the hip (48.4%) as compared to the wrist (22.3%), thigh (5.4%), other locations (14.9%), or not reported (9.0%). Overall, 12.7% of the accelerometers collected raw accelerations and 44.6% were worn for 24 hours/day throughout the collection period. The review identified 155 observational studies of adults that collected accelerometry, utilizing a wide range of accelerometer data processing methods. Researchers inconsistently reported key aspects of the process from collection to analysis, which needs addressing to support accurate comparisons across studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly R. Evenson
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Elissa Scherer
- RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Kennedy M. Peter
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Carmen C. Cuthbertson
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Stephanie Eckman
- RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Current Understanding of the Relationship between Blood Donor Variability and Blood Component Quality. Int J Mol Sci 2021; 22:ijms22083943. [PMID: 33920459 PMCID: PMC8069744 DOI: 10.3390/ijms22083943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2021] [Revised: 04/08/2021] [Accepted: 04/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
While differences among donors has long challenged meeting quality standards for the production of blood components for transfusion, only recently has the molecular basis for many of these differences become understood. This review article will examine our current understanding of the molecular differences that impact the quality of red blood cells (RBC), platelets, and plasma components. Factors affecting RBC quality include cytoskeletal elements and membrane proteins associated with the oxidative response as well as known enzyme polymorphisms and hemoglobin variants. Donor age and health status may also be important. Platelet quality is impacted by variables that are less well understood, but that include platelet storage sensitive metabolic parameters, responsiveness to agonists accumulating in storage containers and factors affecting the maintenance of pH. An increased understanding of these variables can be used to improve the quality of blood components for transfusion by using donor management algorithms based on a donors individual molecular and genetic profile.
Collapse
|